# Japan Forum > Japanese Language & Linguistics >  Is there no translation for (logical) "argument" ?

## Maciamo

How can we express the meaning of "argument",in the sense of a set of reasons given to support or prove something - e.g. an argument for (or against) death penalty ?

I have checked several dictionaries and asked some Japanese explaining exactly what I meant, but there doesn't seem to be a single word in Japanese that means "argument".

I have found these translations, but they do not mean the same kind of argument.

c_ => argument in the sense of discussion or dispute
_ => controversy, dispute, debate
_ => argument in the sense of quarrel or dispute
__ => main topic, major issue, point in question (at issue)
_ => the ground(s) of an argument
R => reason, cause; excuse, pretext

I kanji _ itself coneys the idea of logical argument, but also of theory, doctrine, opinion, discussion, dispute, controversy, discourse, debate, essay, treatise or comment.

How could I for instance say the sentence : "find 5 arguments for and 5 arguments against death penalty" ?

----------


## PaulTB

> How could I for instance say the sentence : "find 5 arguments for and 5 arguments against death penalty" ?


Hmm, how about _. (Stuck 'arguments' into WWWJDIC examples search  :Blush:  )

----------


## CorDarei

> Hmm, how about _. (Stuck 'arguments' into WWWJDIC examples search  )


From Goo:



> 񂫂@_ 
> 
> 
> the basis of [grounds for] an argument.
> `ゾ@Your argument has poor foundation./ You are on tenuous ground with that argument.


Sounds good to me.  :Poh:

----------


## Elizabeth

The easiest rendering would be something like this, although I'm not sure it makes clear there are to be five arguments for each side. Or for that matter how natural the 5 arguments part is itself....  :Poh:  

Yx(ɑ΂A΂)xƔ΂̂T_{ ĂB@@

----------


## CorDarei

> The easiest rendering would be something like this, although I'm not sure it makes clear there are to be five arguments for each side. Or for that matter how natural the 5 arguments part is itself....  
> 
> Yx(ɑ΂A΂)xƔ΂̂T_{ ĂB@@


I did a quick Google search and came up with the following two examples:

R߂̘_

(_) 5

I don't trust the second one too much, but the first might support Yxɑ΂ĎxƔ΂̘_T{Ă B

----------


## Maciamo

If _ means "grounds for an argument" (which for me isn't the same as simply "argument"), how would we say then : "The grounds for your second argument are not valid" ? The grounds is _, but what becomes of the "second argument" part ? Still no translation I guess.

----------


## Elizabeth

> If _ means "grounds for an argument" (which for me isn't the same as simply "argument"), how would we say then : "The grounds for your second argument are not valid" ? The grounds is _, but what becomes of the "second argument" part ? Still no translation I guess.


Yeah, I was concerned about that as well, my only consolation coming from Google and a dictionary reibun "He presented an argument for (against) the war." 푈Ɏ^()_qׂB 

For grounds in the sense of reasoning based or rooted in fact, etc well, .... there may be something to that -- _͎ۂɊÂĂB

----------


## PaulTB

> If _ means "grounds for an argument" (which for me isn't the same as simply "argument"),


It just happens that in English 'grounds for an argument' means the same as one of the meanings of 'argument' in English.




> how would we say then : "The grounds for your second argument are not valid" ? The grounds is _, but what becomes of the "second argument" part ? Still no translation I guess.


But ڂ̘_ *IS* "The second grounds for your (argument/position)".

----------


## Maciamo

> It just happens that in English 'grounds for an argument' means the same as one of the meanings of 'argument' in English.


I don't think so. Here is the appropriate Merriam-Webster's definition for "ground(s)" :

_a basis for belief, action, or argument <ground for complaint> -- often used in plural b (1) : a fundamental logical condition (2) : a basic metaphysical cause_

The "ground(s)" is the _basis_ for the argument, but not the argument itself. For example, if someone says that death penalty should not be legal because "it is immoral" (the argument), I will ask them on which grounds they find it immoral. The answer could be "as a Christian, I consider that killing is immoral" (the part in green is the ground), which is different from the argument itself in blue)

----------


## Elizabeth

> I don't think so. Here is the appropriate Merriam-Webster's definition for "ground(s)" :
> 
> _a basis for belief, action, or argument <ground for complaint> -- often used in plural b (1) : a fundamental logical condition (2) : a basic metaphysical cause_
> 
> The "ground(s)" is the _basis_ for the argument, but not the argument itself.


It may help to think of "Argument" as the debate over capital punishment itself, the "grounds" being particular reasons (arguments 1-5, if you will). On the grounds of, on the grounds that, grounded in....then becomes  or R or whatever in each particular case. Clearly these concepts are translatable, and distinctive enough to have their own set of words associated.

----------


## PaulTB

> _a basis for belief, action, or argument <ground for complaint> -- often used in plural b (1) : a fundamental logical condition (2) : a basic metaphysical cause_
> 
> The "ground(s)" is the _basis_ for the argument, but not the argument itself. For example, if someone says that death penalty should not be legal because "it is immoral" (the argument), I will ask them on which grounds they find it immoral. The answer could be "as a Christian, I consider that killing is immoral" (the part in green is the ground), which is different from the argument itself in blue)


But if you look at the definitions of _argument_ you will see (among others).

_A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood: presented a careful argument for extraterrestrial life._ 

_A fact or statement put forth as proof or evidence; a reason: The current low mortgage rates are an argument for buying a house now._ 

You are only considering 'argument' as the *second* of those while the first can have several 'grounds for the argument'. It is clear from context and example sentences that the Japanese _ is based on the *first* definition of argument and each _ is what you would call an argument.

Anyway if you really want to know how to say something *in Japanese* why are you nitpicking over the English?

----------


## Maciamo

> But if you look at the definitions of _argument_ you will see (among others).
> 
> _A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood: presented a careful argument for extraterrestrial life._ 
> 
> _A fact or statement put forth as proof or evidence; a reason: The current low mortgage rates are an argument for buying a house now._ 
> 
> You are only considering 'argument' as the *second* of those while the first can have several 'grounds for the argument'. It is clear from context and example sentences that the Japanese _ is based on the *first* definition of argument and each _ is what you would call an argument.


Isn't it what I mentioned at the beginning of this thread ? "Argument" as many meanings, but there is *one*  of them for which I cannot fin a translation.

Basically I want to know the original meaning of "argument" as it is in other Latin languages (the word "argument" does not have the meaning of "dispute" in Latin languages). In your two definitions above, the first one would be expressed as "argumentation" and not "argument" in Latin languages.

----------


## Scrivener

Bits from my dictionary:

(cւ)^[]_sfor, in favor of...; against...t
(^[])_,R;__sfor...; against...t.
_̕@,_@;_: I was unable to follow his `.ނ̘_@ɂ͂ĂȂ.
st(ɕwi),e[};v|,[Tij,: the central ` of a book q̒Se[}.

----------


## CorDarei

> Isn't it what I mentioned at the beginning of this thread ? "Argument" as many meanings, but there is *one*  of them for which I cannot fin a translation.
> 
> Basically I want to know the original meaning of "argument" as it is in other Latin languages (the word "argument" does not have the meaning of "dispute" in Latin languages). In your two definitions above, the first one would be expressed as "argumentation" and not "argument" in Latin languages.



How about _̍ as a "basis or grounds for the argument"? I got 5 Google hits, that's good enough for me  :Poh: 

[edit] Just realized that Elizabeth got there first... oh well

----------


## Elizabeth

> But if you look at the definitions of _argument_ you will see (among others).
> 
> _A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood: presented a careful argument for extraterrestrial life._


The debate (argument in Japanese) over capital punishment :
YɂĂ̓_@

Arguments/Reasons for and against (grounds in the Japanese context under discussion here)
_

Basis for those arguments (grounds for/on in English)

i_j̍

Clear enough to everyone ?  :Relieved:

----------


## Pox

"find 5 arguments for and 5 arguments against death penalty"
Yxɑ΂Ă̔"ӌ"E^"ӌ"ꂼ 5ĂB

"The grounds for your second argument are not valid" 
N̓ڂ̎咣""͂B



Ƃ ΁AĂ邩EEE B
ɂēKɖ󂷂ȂłˁB  :Sou ka:

----------


## Elizabeth

> "find 5 arguments for and 5 arguments against death penalty"
> Yxɑ΂Ă̔"ӌ"E^"ӌ"ꂼ 5ĂB
> 
> "The grounds for your second argument are not valid" 
> N̓ڂ̎咣""͂B


ǂ 肪ƂPaxBɗƂ΂茾Ă B  :Cool:   :Poh:  

ƁAh@@h̒́uӌvA ƂȂƂł A
Ӗ͕ĂȃjAX`܂񂩁H @

----------


## Maciamo

> How about _̍ as a "basis or grounds for the argument"? I got 5 Google hits, that's good enough for me


Yeah, sounds reasonably good after all.

----------

